Actually, yes, there is a chance. Intel's Clarksfield processors should arrive in September or October. That's mobile Nehalem quad-core, 45-55W and very expensive. Only Apple's engineers know if Apple can shove that in a Macbook.
Here's a prototype Intel was showing off:
Note the eight threads in the lower left.
Processors that use less power will come in the first half of next year.
So, IYO, is there any chance it gets released in september?
First remember that the MAc Books got refreshed just a couple of months ago. The only unit that didn't see a significant upgrade was the 17" MBP. So if we are likely to see such an upgrade it would be here.
Second, apparently Intel is having a lot of success with their 32nm process. If true Apple could simply wait for that upgrade. Some have even rumored that Intel would skip 45nm and go directly to 32nm. The speculation is interesting to say the least but we don't really know how bad the 45 nm parts will be in practice when it comes to power disappation. For Apples laptops 45 watts is stiff so they might wait for the lower power models.
This only reflects upon the laptops, I can see an immediate move to the processors on the iMacs. The smaller laptops will see nothing until the 32nm chips hit, so the only possibility right now is an upgraded 17" MBP.
As to the specifics of a September release I'd have to say no. At least not early September when they will be occupied with the new iPods and possibly a tablet. Worst initial pricing seems to indicate that apple may be forced to raise prices if they adopt early. This would be very bad right now. Of course this depends upon what deal they can get from Intel.
How you like that, lots of words with little said. This highlights one thing, don't make buying decisions based on what is speculated in these threads as NOBODY on this forum knows anything concrete. However on thing everybody here can say for certain is that it is now time to hold off purchases. We may not know the how's, why's or when's but we know substantially new machines are close. Likely iMacs first followed by the laptops.
I wouldn't even bet on the fact that Apple will go quad-core straight away.
Intel will likely also introduce dual-core Nehalem mobile CPUs. That's still 2 cores, but each core running 2 threads due to Hyperthreading, for a total of 4 threads.
Those should be faster still than today's dual-core CPUs, especially with Snow Leopard's multi-threading architecture.
If we see any new 45nm mobile CPUs (before the 32nm process ones arrive) these quad-thread ones might be it.
If anything happens this year the timeframe will likely be October or November.
Also there is a small minority of 'dreamers' who believe that Snow Leopard will support Blu-Ray drives and that not long after Snow Leopard arrives Apple will upgrade the MacBook Pros with Blu-Ray options, including a small CPU update.
I wouldn't even bet on the fact that Apple will go quad-core straight away.
Intel will likely also introduce dual-core Nehalem mobile CPUs. That's still 2 cores, but each core running 2 threads due to Hyperthreading, for a total of 4 threads.
Those should be faster still than today's dual-core CPUs, especially with Snow Leopard's multi-threading architecture.
If we see any new 45nm mobile CPUs (before the 32nm process ones arrive) these quad-thread ones might be it.
If anything happens this year the timeframe will likely be October or November.
Also there is a small minority of 'dreamers' who believe that Snow Leopard will support Blu-Ray drives and that not long after Snow Leopard arrives Apple will upgrade the MacBook Pros with Blu-Ray options, including a small CPU update.
Might happen, but not very likely.
Dual-core (quad-thread) mobile nehalem cpus will be on a 32nm process and will arrive in quantity early 2010 (arrandale).
Before that, in september/october, mobile nehalem quads (8 threads) will be available (on a 45 nm process): clarksfield, low clock and expensive.
Using clarksfield in a MBP will probably increase its price by up to $500 (the current 3.06GHz C2D retails for $530, the future 2.00GHz clarksfield will retail for over $1,000).
I don't see a significant MBP update before early 2010 anyway.
Dual-core (quad-thread) mobile nehalem cpus will be on a 32nm process and will arrive in quantity early 2010 (arrandale).
Before that, in september/october, mobile nehalem quads (8 threads) will be available (on a 45 nm process): clarksfield, low clock and expensive.
Using clarksfield in a MBP will probably increase its price by up to $500 (the current 3.06GHz C2D retails for $530, the future 2.00GHz clarksfield will retail for over $1,000).
I don't see a significant MBP update before early 2010 anyway.
Based on that info, seems like Apple will prob refresh in early 2010 with the mobile nehalem dual-core (4 thread) arrandale processors and skip the extremely expensive clarksfield ones. Maybe in early 2010 they'll offer clarksfield as a BTO on the MBP, but more likely a BTO on the top-end iMac.
Based on that info, seems like Apple will prob refresh in early 2010 with the mobile nehalem dual-core (4 thread) arrandale processors and skip the extremely expensive clarksfield ones. Maybe in early 2010 they'll offer clarksfield as a BTO on the MBP, but more likely a BTO on the top-end iMac.
Arrandale would be a low end solution for the smaller Mac Books. The 17" machine though really needs a quad core processor.
The reality is if Intel can build Arrandale on 32nm it can build a quad core on that process. In fact 32nm should be all around better for the quad core.
As to updates everything except for the 17" MBP is a way off. The 17" MBP will likely get an update soon after the processors suitable debut.
Arrandale would be a low end solution for the smaller Mac Books. The 17" machine though really needs a quad core processor.
The reality is if Intel can build Arrandale on 32nm it can build a quad core on that process. In fact 32nm should be all around better for the quad core.
As to updates everything except for the 17" MBP is a way off. The 17" MBP will likely get an update soon after the processors suitable debut.
Arrandale will cover a large range, from the low end through the mid-range. I think we'll see it used in all of Apple's notebooks before any of them get quads.
Dual-core (quad-thread) mobile nehalem cpus will be on a 32nm process and will arrive in quantity early 2010 (arrandale).
Before that, in september/october, mobile nehalem quads (8 threads) will be available (on a 45 nm process): clarksfield, low clock and expensive.
Using clarksfield in a MBP will probably increase its price by up to $500 (the current 3.06GHz C2D retails for $530, the future 2.00GHz clarksfield will retail for over $1,000).
I don't see a significant MBP update before early 2010 anyway.
Exactly.
I do not believe we will get any quad-core Clarksfield processor in any MacBook Pro.
It's too expensive and slower for most applications.
Apple will skip that one.
And with Arrandale I would expect Apple to milk it. Use the dual-core quad-thread version first.
If we're lucky we will see a high-end quad-core configuration. But I doubt it.
I would bet February/March 2010 sees Arrandale dual-core quad-thread MacBook Pros and July/August 2010 will see a small upgrade with the first quad-core MacBook Pros. Likely only the 17" MBP.
People, we're talking almost a year until the very first quad-core CPU MacBook Pro!
Forget about quad-core laptops - regardless how much Apple needs them.
The chart above shows the Arrandale cpus that should be available at the end of this year and into early next year.
My bet is that the MBPs will use the 520m, 540m and 620m chips. I think the MBA and MB may stay with core 2 duos.
Even thought these are only dual core chips the turbo boost feature and hyper threading ought to make these chips much faster than the core 2 chips that are in the current MBPs. I'm anxious for Anandtech to get a hold of these and test them.
I wonder if we'll see many computer companies (including Apple) advertising machines with these chips by only the Turbo Boost speeds rather than their actual clock speeds.
"Powered by Intel Core i7 620M at up to 3.33GHz!"
Which is completely dishonest, and totally something retailers would do.
If I buy a macbook pro now would it be possible to upgrade the processor to a quad when they come out? I'm aware that the board and socket needs to be the same.... just wondering what are your thoughts? \
Now that would be cool, though I wouldn't expect an upgrade as the MBP's we're update in June! My best guess would be you'll see the next update in Feb / Mar / Apr next year
If I buy a macbook pro now would it be possible to upgrade the processor to a quad when they come out? I'm aware that the board and socket needs to be the same.... just wondering what are your thoughts? \
No. The processors are soldered in, they're not socketed.
If I buy a macbook pro now would it be possible to upgrade the processor to a quad when they come out? I'm aware that the board and socket needs to be the same.... just wondering what are your thoughts? \
Last I knew the processors where soldered in. Plus we are talking about a new generation of processors. Laptops are usually not upgradeable anyways.
The chart above shows the Arrandale cpus that should be available at the end of this year and into early next year.
Nice chart! It is not however the entire Intel line up. The interesting thing, for me anyways, is the breadth of the line up.
Quote:
My bet is that the MBPs will use the 520m, 540m and 620m chips. I think the MBA and MB may stay with core 2 duos.
Why would you think that Apple would put I5 based processors in it's Mac Book Pro lineup. Seriously Intel has a suitable I7 based chip for every model of MBP.
Frankly I'm a little short on info that defines the difference between I5 and I7 but I do know that I7 has many feature that go beyound Core 2. Some of these features should make a big difference when it comes to the new capabilities in SL.
Quote:
Even thought these are only dual core chips the turbo boost feature and hyper threading ought to make these chips much faster than the core 2 chips that are in the current MBPs. I'm anxious for Anandtech to get a hold of these and test them.
Yes testing would be nice today because it might encourage people to hold off on their Mac Book Pro and iMac purchases. However we already know that I7 processors are a considerable improvement over the old Core 2 lineup. Hopefully this transfers to Clarksfield and Arandale.
As for Turbo Boost I think it is more of a gimmick on a dual core processor than anything else. With the coming of SL I would imagine any benefit from Turbo Boost would be extremely minor.
In anyevent I7 does have features that SL should be able to leverage. This to me is going to be very interesting to see, that is how well do these new processors and SL interact. It is also why I reccomend to every body that asks to hold off on Mac purchases. As can be seen from your line up there is a processor suitable for every Mac going. That is iMac, MBP's, Mini and anything else that Apple might be producing in the near future.
So I can see a lot of significant updates coming in the next few months. Most likely Apple will start with iMacs, the Mini and possibly the 17" MBP. Later the rest of the portables can be updated. Frankly the Mini with Arrandale in it could be a significant improvement.
Frankly I'm a little short on info that defines the difference between I5 and I7 but I do know that I7 has many feature that go beyound Core 2.
Intel has set out to cause as much confusion as possible with the new naming scheme. The names aren't comparable between desktop and mobile processors, and you can't even tell from its name if a processor is dual or quad-core.
Here's the desktop CPU naming scheme (which doesn't apply to the mobile processors we're discussing, but what the hell):
Core i7: quad-core sockets 1366 or 1156, triple or dual-channel memory, Hyperthreading and Turbo Boost
Core i5: (socket 1156) quad-core without Hyperthreading or dual-core with Hyperthreading and Turbo Boost (but no VT-D)
Core i3: (socket 1156) dual core with Hyperthreading but without Turbo Boost
Pentium G: (socket 1156) dual core without HT or TB
All the dual-core i5, i3, and P-G all have integrated graphics on the CPU, but none of the quad-core i7 or i5 have an IGP yet.
That's the desktop processors. Which name goes with which features on the mobile processors is even more confusing. There probably will be both quad and dual core i7 mobile.
Why would you think that Apple would put I5 based processors in it's Mac Book Pro lineup. Seriously Intel has a suitable I7 based chip for every model of MBP.
Dave
I have no inside information, but the fastest nehalem cpus will likely provide the best performance. The other i7 ( 620LM, 640LM, 620UM, 640UM) cpus are mostly a balance of performance and low power consumption . They will probably be excellent as well but I suspect with the MBP lineup Apple will go for the best performance. After all with the new batteries they have in the MBP line, they needn't be as concerned with power consumption as other pc manufacturers. I suspect that as long as battery time doesn't suffer significantly with the 35 w nehalems that'll be the cpus that Apple will use.
As for Turbo Boost I think it is more of a gimmick on a dual core processor than anything else. With the coming of SL I would imagine any benefit from Turbo Boost would be extremely minor.
I disagree with this. I don't have the link in front of me but Anand Lai Shimpi has been very enthusiastic about i5 precisely because it has a higher turbo boost than i7. In some instances this allowed i5 to perform better than i7. Overall the difference between i5 and i7 is small because the i5 has a better turbo boost feature than i7 which helps make up for i5's weaknesses elsewhere.
TB ought to be a nice feature to have until we get apps that are written to take advantage of OpenCl and GCD. That's no going to be available at the release of SL.
Nice chart! It is not however the entire Intel line up. The interesting thing, for me anyways, is the breadth of the line up.
Why would you think that Apple would put I5 based processors in it's Mac Book Pro lineup. Seriously Intel has a suitable I7 based chip for every model of MBP.
Frankly I'm a little short on info that defines the difference between I5 and I7 but I do know that I7 has many feature that go beyound Core 2. Some of these features should make a big difference when it comes to the new capabilities in SL.
Those are all the mobile cpus that will be released late Q4/early Q1. What's missing are the mobile quads (to be released later this quarter, or so) and the mobile Core i3 (to be released in Q2 2010).
Have you read the chart? Do you really understand it? I am not so sure... Only one Core i7 is MBP-class, the others are equivalent to the LV C2D (MacBook Air) and the ULV C2D (not used by Apple, yet). You want Core i7 everywhere, yet you admit not knowing the difference between models of nehalem cpus.
Do you really think that Apple is using la crême de la crême cpus in the current MBP?
entry level: OEM-only P7550 C2D (that's almost the bottom of the barrel in terms of mobile C2D)
midrange: P8700/P8800 entry level C2D (only 3MB of cache)
high-end: T9600/T9900 mid/high-end C2D (6MB cache) - Do you start seeing the trend, here?
mobile Core i5 cpus have 3MB of cache
mobile Core i7 cpus have 4MB of cache (the quads have 4/6/8MB of cache)
mobile Core i3 cpus will be celeron replacement (with probably just 1MB of cache) Q2 2010
As far as the features go, mobile Core i5 and Core i7 will have the exact same set, the only difference is the clock and the cache.
There's a good chance that the nehalem MBP, will follow the same trend as today:
2.26GHz (P7550) 13" MBP =? Core i5-xxxM 2.13/2.26 EOM-only (we don't want another price increase, do we?)
If in the end (Q1 2010) we get better than that, great! But let's be realistic, I've already put two quad models in the line-up...
Now, if Apple chooses to use Intel's small and cheap 55/57 chipset (vs the 9400M chipset or any eventual other nvidia chipset), chances are we could get new/dedicated GPUs in all MBPs, nvidia or ATI. I think that it would be a nice feature, better than anything that could generate a price increase.
Everything in Core i3/i5/i7 goes beyond C2D: they are all nehalem (the new architecture), and the i5/i7 in the chart will be on a 32nm process (not the quads, still on 45nm).
SL will be as good as how the developers update their apps to take advantage of it. We know Apple will probably have many apps updated for SL at launch, but it will take some time for other developers (Adobe, Microsoft, Avid,...). Don't get me wrong, I think SL will be by itself a great update, and for all Intel Macs, not just the new/future ones.
Comments
Here's a prototype Intel was showing off:
Note the eight threads in the lower left.
Processors that use less power will come in the first half of next year.
So, IYO, is there any chance it gets released in september?
First remember that the MAc Books got refreshed just a couple of months ago. The only unit that didn't see a significant upgrade was the 17" MBP. So if we are likely to see such an upgrade it would be here.
Second, apparently Intel is having a lot of success with their 32nm process. If true Apple could simply wait for that upgrade. Some have even rumored that Intel would skip 45nm and go directly to 32nm. The speculation is interesting to say the least but we don't really know how bad the 45 nm parts will be in practice when it comes to power disappation. For Apples laptops 45 watts is stiff so they might wait for the lower power models.
This only reflects upon the laptops, I can see an immediate move to the processors on the iMacs. The smaller laptops will see nothing until the 32nm chips hit, so the only possibility right now is an upgraded 17" MBP.
As to the specifics of a September release I'd have to say no. At least not early September when they will be occupied with the new iPods and possibly a tablet. Worst initial pricing seems to indicate that apple may be forced to raise prices if they adopt early. This would be very bad right now. Of course this depends upon what deal they can get from Intel.
How you like that, lots of words with little said. This highlights one thing, don't make buying decisions based on what is speculated in these threads as NOBODY on this forum knows anything concrete. However on thing everybody here can say for certain is that it is now time to hold off purchases. We may not know the how's, why's or when's but we know substantially new machines are close. Likely iMacs first followed by the laptops.
Dave
Intel will likely also introduce dual-core Nehalem mobile CPUs. That's still 2 cores, but each core running 2 threads due to Hyperthreading, for a total of 4 threads.
Those should be faster still than today's dual-core CPUs, especially with Snow Leopard's multi-threading architecture.
If we see any new 45nm mobile CPUs (before the 32nm process ones arrive) these quad-thread ones might be it.
If anything happens this year the timeframe will likely be October or November.
Also there is a small minority of 'dreamers' who believe that Snow Leopard will support Blu-Ray drives and that not long after Snow Leopard arrives Apple will upgrade the MacBook Pros with Blu-Ray options, including a small CPU update.
Might happen, but not very likely.
I wouldn't even bet on the fact that Apple will go quad-core straight away.
Intel will likely also introduce dual-core Nehalem mobile CPUs. That's still 2 cores, but each core running 2 threads due to Hyperthreading, for a total of 4 threads.
Those should be faster still than today's dual-core CPUs, especially with Snow Leopard's multi-threading architecture.
If we see any new 45nm mobile CPUs (before the 32nm process ones arrive) these quad-thread ones might be it.
If anything happens this year the timeframe will likely be October or November.
Also there is a small minority of 'dreamers' who believe that Snow Leopard will support Blu-Ray drives and that not long after Snow Leopard arrives Apple will upgrade the MacBook Pros with Blu-Ray options, including a small CPU update.
Might happen, but not very likely.
Dual-core (quad-thread) mobile nehalem cpus will be on a 32nm process and will arrive in quantity early 2010 (arrandale).
Before that, in september/october, mobile nehalem quads (8 threads) will be available (on a 45 nm process): clarksfield, low clock and expensive.
Using clarksfield in a MBP will probably increase its price by up to $500 (the current 3.06GHz C2D retails for $530, the future 2.00GHz clarksfield will retail for over $1,000).
I don't see a significant MBP update before early 2010 anyway.
Dual-core (quad-thread) mobile nehalem cpus will be on a 32nm process and will arrive in quantity early 2010 (arrandale).
Before that, in september/october, mobile nehalem quads (8 threads) will be available (on a 45 nm process): clarksfield, low clock and expensive.
Using clarksfield in a MBP will probably increase its price by up to $500 (the current 3.06GHz C2D retails for $530, the future 2.00GHz clarksfield will retail for over $1,000).
I don't see a significant MBP update before early 2010 anyway.
Based on that info, seems like Apple will prob refresh in early 2010 with the mobile nehalem dual-core (4 thread) arrandale processors and skip the extremely expensive clarksfield ones. Maybe in early 2010 they'll offer clarksfield as a BTO on the MBP, but more likely a BTO on the top-end iMac.
Based on that info, seems like Apple will prob refresh in early 2010 with the mobile nehalem dual-core (4 thread) arrandale processors and skip the extremely expensive clarksfield ones. Maybe in early 2010 they'll offer clarksfield as a BTO on the MBP, but more likely a BTO on the top-end iMac.
Arrandale would be a low end solution for the smaller Mac Books. The 17" machine though really needs a quad core processor.
The reality is if Intel can build Arrandale on 32nm it can build a quad core on that process. In fact 32nm should be all around better for the quad core.
As to updates everything except for the 17" MBP is a way off. The 17" MBP will likely get an update soon after the processors suitable debut.
Dave
Arrandale would be a low end solution for the smaller Mac Books. The 17" machine though really needs a quad core processor.
The reality is if Intel can build Arrandale on 32nm it can build a quad core on that process. In fact 32nm should be all around better for the quad core.
As to updates everything except for the 17" MBP is a way off. The 17" MBP will likely get an update soon after the processors suitable debut.
Arrandale will cover a large range, from the low end through the mid-range. I think we'll see it used in all of Apple's notebooks before any of them get quads.
Dual-core (quad-thread) mobile nehalem cpus will be on a 32nm process and will arrive in quantity early 2010 (arrandale).
Before that, in september/october, mobile nehalem quads (8 threads) will be available (on a 45 nm process): clarksfield, low clock and expensive.
Using clarksfield in a MBP will probably increase its price by up to $500 (the current 3.06GHz C2D retails for $530, the future 2.00GHz clarksfield will retail for over $1,000).
I don't see a significant MBP update before early 2010 anyway.
Exactly.
I do not believe we will get any quad-core Clarksfield processor in any MacBook Pro.
It's too expensive and slower for most applications.
Apple will skip that one.
And with Arrandale I would expect Apple to milk it. Use the dual-core quad-thread version first.
If we're lucky we will see a high-end quad-core configuration. But I doubt it.
I would bet February/March 2010 sees Arrandale dual-core quad-thread MacBook Pros and July/August 2010 will see a small upgrade with the first quad-core MacBook Pros. Likely only the 17" MBP.
People, we're talking almost a year until the very first quad-core CPU MacBook Pro!
Forget about quad-core laptops - regardless how much Apple needs them.
If you want 4 cores, get a Mac Pro.
The chart above shows the Arrandale cpus that should be available at the end of this year and into early next year.
My bet is that the MBPs will use the 520m, 540m and 620m chips. I think the MBA and MB may stay with core 2 duos.
Even thought these are only dual core chips the turbo boost feature and hyper threading ought to make these chips much faster than the core 2 chips that are in the current MBPs. I'm anxious for Anandtech to get a hold of these and test them.
"Powered by Intel Core i7 620M at up to 3.33GHz!"
Which is completely dishonest, and totally something retailers would do.
If I buy a macbook pro now would it be possible to upgrade the processor to a quad when they come out? I'm aware that the board and socket needs to be the same.... just wondering what are your thoughts?
No. The processors are soldered in, they're not socketed.
If I buy a macbook pro now would it be possible to upgrade the processor to a quad when they come out? I'm aware that the board and socket needs to be the same.... just wondering what are your thoughts?
Last I knew the processors where soldered in. Plus we are talking about a new generation of processors. Laptops are usually not upgradeable anyways.
Dave
The chart above shows the Arrandale cpus that should be available at the end of this year and into early next year.
Nice chart! It is not however the entire Intel line up. The interesting thing, for me anyways, is the breadth of the line up.
My bet is that the MBPs will use the 520m, 540m and 620m chips. I think the MBA and MB may stay with core 2 duos.
Why would you think that Apple would put I5 based processors in it's Mac Book Pro lineup. Seriously Intel has a suitable I7 based chip for every model of MBP.
Frankly I'm a little short on info that defines the difference between I5 and I7 but I do know that I7 has many feature that go beyound Core 2. Some of these features should make a big difference when it comes to the new capabilities in SL.
Even thought these are only dual core chips the turbo boost feature and hyper threading ought to make these chips much faster than the core 2 chips that are in the current MBPs. I'm anxious for Anandtech to get a hold of these and test them.
Yes testing would be nice today because it might encourage people to hold off on their Mac Book Pro and iMac purchases. However we already know that I7 processors are a considerable improvement over the old Core 2 lineup. Hopefully this transfers to Clarksfield and Arandale.
As for Turbo Boost I think it is more of a gimmick on a dual core processor than anything else. With the coming of SL I would imagine any benefit from Turbo Boost would be extremely minor.
In anyevent I7 does have features that SL should be able to leverage. This to me is going to be very interesting to see, that is how well do these new processors and SL interact. It is also why I reccomend to every body that asks to hold off on Mac purchases. As can be seen from your line up there is a processor suitable for every Mac going. That is iMac, MBP's, Mini and anything else that Apple might be producing in the near future.
So I can see a lot of significant updates coming in the next few months. Most likely Apple will start with iMacs, the Mini and possibly the 17" MBP. Later the rest of the portables can be updated. Frankly the Mini with Arrandale in it could be a significant improvement.
Dave
Frankly I'm a little short on info that defines the difference between I5 and I7 but I do know that I7 has many feature that go beyound Core 2.
Intel has set out to cause as much confusion as possible with the new naming scheme. The names aren't comparable between desktop and mobile processors, and you can't even tell from its name if a processor is dual or quad-core.
Here's the desktop CPU naming scheme (which doesn't apply to the mobile processors we're discussing, but what the hell): That's the desktop processors. Which name goes with which features on the mobile processors is even more confusing. There probably will be both quad and dual core i7 mobile.
Why would you think that Apple would put I5 based processors in it's Mac Book Pro lineup. Seriously Intel has a suitable I7 based chip for every model of MBP.
Dave
I have no inside information, but the fastest nehalem cpus will likely provide the best performance. The other i7 ( 620LM, 640LM, 620UM, 640UM) cpus are mostly a balance of performance and low power consumption . They will probably be excellent as well but I suspect with the MBP lineup Apple will go for the best performance. After all with the new batteries they have in the MBP line, they needn't be as concerned with power consumption as other pc manufacturers. I suspect that as long as battery time doesn't suffer significantly with the 35 w nehalems that'll be the cpus that Apple will use.
As for Turbo Boost I think it is more of a gimmick on a dual core processor than anything else. With the coming of SL I would imagine any benefit from Turbo Boost would be extremely minor.
I disagree with this. I don't have the link in front of me but Anand Lai Shimpi has been very enthusiastic about i5 precisely because it has a higher turbo boost than i7. In some instances this allowed i5 to perform better than i7. Overall the difference between i5 and i7 is small because the i5 has a better turbo boost feature than i7 which helps make up for i5's weaknesses elsewhere.
TB ought to be a nice feature to have until we get apps that are written to take advantage of OpenCl and GCD. That's no going to be available at the release of SL.
Nice chart! It is not however the entire Intel line up. The interesting thing, for me anyways, is the breadth of the line up.
Why would you think that Apple would put I5 based processors in it's Mac Book Pro lineup. Seriously Intel has a suitable I7 based chip for every model of MBP.
Frankly I'm a little short on info that defines the difference between I5 and I7 but I do know that I7 has many feature that go beyound Core 2. Some of these features should make a big difference when it comes to the new capabilities in SL.
Those are all the mobile cpus that will be released late Q4/early Q1. What's missing are the mobile quads (to be released later this quarter, or so) and the mobile Core i3 (to be released in Q2 2010).
Have you read the chart? Do you really understand it? I am not so sure... Only one Core i7 is MBP-class, the others are equivalent to the LV C2D (MacBook Air) and the ULV C2D (not used by Apple, yet). You want Core i7 everywhere, yet you admit not knowing the difference between models of nehalem cpus.
Do you really think that Apple is using la crême de la crême cpus in the current MBP?
entry level: OEM-only P7550 C2D (that's almost the bottom of the barrel in terms of mobile C2D)
midrange: P8700/P8800 entry level C2D (only 3MB of cache)
high-end: T9600/T9900 mid/high-end C2D (6MB cache) - Do you start seeing the trend, here?
mobile Core i5 cpus have 3MB of cache
mobile Core i7 cpus have 4MB of cache (the quads have 4/6/8MB of cache)
mobile Core i3 cpus will be celeron replacement (with probably just 1MB of cache) Q2 2010
As far as the features go, mobile Core i5 and Core i7 will have the exact same set, the only difference is the clock and the cache.
There's a good chance that the nehalem MBP, will follow the same trend as today:
2.26GHz (P7550) 13" MBP =? Core i5-xxxM 2.13/2.26 EOM-only (we don't want another price increase, do we?)
2.53GHz (P8700) 13" MBP =? Core i5-520M 2.40GHz
2.53GHz (P8700) 15" MBP =? Core i5-520M 2.40GHz
2.66GHz (P8800) 15" MBP =? Core i5-540M 2.53GHz
2.80GHz (T9600) 15" MBP =? Core i7-620M 2.66GHz
3.06GHz (T9900) 15" MBP =? Core i7-820QM 1.73GHz (BTO +$300)
2.80GHz (T9600) 17" MBP =? Core i7-620M 2.66GHz
3.06GHz (T9900) 17" MBP =? Core i7-820QM 1.73GHz (BTO +$300)
If in the end (Q1 2010) we get better than that, great! But let's be realistic, I've already put two quad models in the line-up...
Now, if Apple chooses to use Intel's small and cheap 55/57 chipset (vs the 9400M chipset or any eventual other nvidia chipset), chances are we could get new/dedicated GPUs in all MBPs, nvidia or ATI. I think that it would be a nice feature, better than anything that could generate a price increase.
Everything in Core i3/i5/i7 goes beyond C2D: they are all nehalem (the new architecture), and the i5/i7 in the chart will be on a 32nm process (not the quads, still on 45nm).
SL will be as good as how the developers update their apps to take advantage of it. We know Apple will probably have many apps updated for SL at launch, but it will take some time for other developers (Adobe, Microsoft, Avid,...). Don't get me wrong, I think SL will be by itself a great update, and for all Intel Macs, not just the new/future ones.